President Obama said Wednesday that he has not yet made a decision on whether he will order a military strike against Syria, but said the U.S. government has concluded that Bashar Assad’s regime has deployed chemical weapons. In an interview on PBS’ NewsHour following his address to mark the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, Obama added that he has “no interest” in an open-ended conflict. “I have not made a decision,” Obama said in the interview. “I have gotten options from our military, had extensive discussions with my national security team.”

Obama said, however, that the Syrian regime’s alleged use of chemical weapons would factor into his calculation to act, and he warned that the Assad regime should be held accountable. “I have not made a decision, but I think it’s important that if, in fact, we make a choice to have repercussions for the use of chemical weapons, then the Assad regime, which is involved in a civil war, trying to protect itself, will have received a pretty strong signal that in fact, it better not do it again,” Obama said. “And that doesn’t solve all the problems inside of Syria, and you know, it doesn’t, obviously, end the death of innocent civilians inside of Syria. “

Ian Millhiser: Conservatives Have Twisted The Word ‘Freedom’ Into Something Martin Luther King Would Never Recognize

“Freedom” doesn’t mean what it used to mean. Fifty years ago, when Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. approached the podium at the original March on Washington, he carried with him a robust sense of what Americans needed to accomplish in order to become a free society. When he stood in Lincoln’s shadow and lamented the “tragic fact that the Negro is still not free,” he was not speaking about a surplus of health care entitlements. When he called for all Americans to be granted the “riches of freedom and the security of justice” he was not concerned that the heirs to their parents’ fortunes might be required to pay a share of those fortune in taxes. Dr. King did not march to get Washington off his back. He marched because he understood that the path to freedom traveled straight through the U.S. Capitol, and that what he labeled the “marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community” would amount to nothing unless the promise of equality was enshrined in law.

By 1895, Field’s libertarian constitution replaced the Constitution of the United States. In just a few short months, the Supreme Court struck down the income tax, gave its blessing to monopolists, and asserted sweeping new powers to weaken labor unions. Six years after Field’s death, the Supreme Court handed down its infamous Lochner decision, which treated any law improving the conditions of workers as constitutionally suspect due to what the Court labeled “freedom of contract.” This is the vision of “freedom” so often touted by American conservatives — indeed, Sen. Paul recently held up Lochner as a “wonderful decision” that should guide America’s judges and policymakers today. Freedom, to Paul and other like-minded thinkers, is the freedom to exploit and the freedom to be exploited.

ThinkProgress: No, Martin Luther King Jr. Was Not A Republican — But Here’s What He Had To Say About Them

“Most people don’t talk about the fact that Martin Luther King was a Republican.”

That’s a quote from Ada Fisher, a Republican National Committeewoman from North Carolina, that was published without qualification or correction this week by ABC News.

Fisher is wrong on two fronts. First, many people talk about the “fact” that King was a Republican. It is asserted incessantly by conservatives on Twitter and elsewhere on the internet, especially in the lead up to today’s 50th anniversary of the March on Washington. The claim is most prominently advanced by King’s niece, Republican activist Alveda King. Over the years, conservative groups have purchased billboards making the claim.

President Barack Obama meets with Ambassador Donald Booth, Special Envoy for Sudan and South Sudan, in the Oval Office, Aug. 28 (Photo by Pete Souza)

****

USA Today: President Obama tapped his outgoing ambassador to Ethiopia on Wednesday to serve as his special envoy for Sudan and South Sudan.

Obama called Donald Booth “one of America’s most experienced diplomats, with broad experience in helping promote peace and prevent conflict across Africa.”

He is specifically charged with leading the American effort to implement security agreements the two countries agreed to last year and helping resolve long-running disputes over borders and sharing of oil wealth.

President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama wait to be introduced at Xavier University in New Orleans, La., before delivering remarks marking the five-year anniversary of hurricane Katrina, Aug. 29, 2010. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

****

Bill Clinton set to give a speech on Obamacare 9/4, in Arkansas, a few weeks before open enrollment starts.

Sara Kliff: Huffington Post’s Jason Cherkis spent two days at the Kentucky State Fair with workers from Kynect, the state’s health marketplace. He came back with a better understanding of deep-fried Kool Aid (“funnel cake dough flavored with the powdered drink mix”) and this fantastic anecdote.

A middle-aged man in a red golf shirt shuffles up to a small folding table with gold trim, in a booth adorned with a flotilla of helium balloons, where government workers at the Kentucky State Fair are hawking the virtues of Kynect, the state’s health benefit exchange established by Obamacare. The man is impressed. “This beats Obamacare I hope,” he mutters to one of the workers. “Do I burst his bubble?” wonders Reina Diaz-Dempsey, overseeing the operation. She doesn’t. If he signs up, it’s a win-win, whether he knows he’s been ensnared by Obamacare or not.

This speaks to a point that others, particularly Jonathan Bernstein, have already made: When Americans actually interact with Obamacare, it won’t be called Obamacare at all. In Kentucky, for example, it will be Kynect, the state health marketplace. In Idaho, local residents will purchase coverage from Your Health Idaho. Covered Oregon will serve (surprise!) Oregonians, while neighboring Washingtonians will purchase coverage from WAHealthPlanFinder. If you watch the ads that states have produced to support their marketplaces, they rarely mention the federal law that has set these changes in action.

President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama greet Maude Smith and members of her family at Smith’s home in New Orleans, La., Aug. 29, 2010. The President and First Lady were visiting New Orleans to mark the five-year anniversary of hurricane Katrina. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

The latest Obamacare story getting everybody’s attention is about the United Parcel Service. On Wednesday, Kaiser Health News and USA Today reported that UPS was making a change in its employee health plan—and that, as a result, 15,000 spouses of UPS employees would lose access to company insurance. One reason for the change, according to the company, is that UPS faces higher insurance costs from Obamacare. Eliminating coverage for these spouses is one way the company can reduce its employee benefit costs.

Employers have been trying to control or cut employee benefit costs for a long time, and it’s no surprise they eventually started looking at spousal coverage. The idea is a relic from an era when dual-income couples were still relatively uncommon. In those years, employers had every reason to offer (mostly male) employees spousal insurance, since the (mostly female) spouses usually had no other source of coverage. But in the last ten to twenty years, as more women have entered the workforce and two-income families have become more common, companies have started asking why they should subsidize coverage for spouses who could just as easily get insurance from their own employers.

Meanwhile, it’s not like UPS is simply kicking spouses to the health care curb. The new exclusion applies only to spouses who have jobs that offer insurance. (At UPS, that’s about half the spouses who get coverage now.) As a result, nobody is actually becoming uninsured because of this change. On the contrary, even as some spouses get coverage elsewhere, more employees and young adult dependents will be getting coverage from UPS.

President Barack Obama, First Lady Michelle Obama, and daughters Sasha and Malia, eat lunch at Parkway Bakery and Tavern in New Orleans, La., Aug. 29, 2010. Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett is seated at left. The First Family was visiting New Orleans to mark the five-year anniversary of hurricane Katrina. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

The U.S. economy expanded at a faster pace in the second quarter as a smaller trade deficit and gains in inventories overshadowed the effects of federal budget cutbacks. Gross domestic product rose at a 2.5 percent annualized rate, up from an initial estimate of 1.7 percent, Commerce Department figures showed today in Washington. The median forecast of 79 economists surveyed by Bloomberg projected a 2.2 percent gain.

Consumer spending climbed 1.8 percent, the same as previously reported, propelled by gains in durable goods such as automobiles and appliances. That followed a 2.3 percent increase from January through March. Purchases added 1.2 percentage points to growth. Consumers’ purchasing power improved, with disposable income adjusted for inflation rising at a 3.2 percent annualized rate from April through June after a 7.9 percent decrease in the first quarter. The saving rate in that period increased to 4.5 percent from 4.1 percent.

First Lady Michelle Obama participates in a “Pop the Question” question and answer segment during a taping of the “Rachael Ray Show” at Chelsea Television Studios in New York, N.Y., Aug. 29, 2012. The First Lady’s appearance was part of a back to school tour to discuss improvements to the federal guidelines for school lunches that go into effect this school year, and updates to the Presidential Youth Fitness Program. (Official White House Photo by Sonya N. Hebert)

****

President Barack Obama reacts after recognizing actress Sissy Spacek in Charlottesville, Va., Aug. 29, 2012. The President happened upon Spacek while greeting people following a stop in the town. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

****

First Lady Michelle Obama and Dr. Mehmet Oz jump rope during a taping of the “Dr. Oz Show,” at Rockefeller Plaza in New York, N.Y., Aug. 29, 2012. The First Lady’s appearance was part of a back to school tour to discuss improvements to federal guidelines for school lunches and updates to the Presidential Youth Fitness Program. (Official White House Photo by Sonya N. Hebert)

****

President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama greet members of Maude Smith’s family at her home in New Orleans, La., Aug. 29, 2010. The President and First Lady were visiting New Orleans to mark the five-year anniversary of hurricane Katrina. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

Thanks UT for another FANTASTIC round-up. I LOVE the local Newspaper headlines & accompanying pics – such a refreshing sincerity in reports compared to the corporate-owned Cable TV and print media propaganda machine.

Still basking in the glow of yesterday. Will watch the entire PBS interview when I get home from work. Thank you for posting it.
Totally confident our POTUS will do the right thing on Syria. I remember all the naysayers about his policy on Libya. Who was right!!!

Striving to take action where Congress would not, the Obama administration announced new steps Thursday on gun control, curbing the import of military surplus weapons and proposing to close a little-known loophole that lets felons and others circumvent background checks by registering guns to corporations.

… One new policy will end a government practice that lets military weapons, sold or donated by the U.S. to allies, be reimported into the U.S. by private entities, where some may end up on the streets. The White House said the U.S. has approved 250,000 of those guns to be reimported since 2005; under the new policy, only museums and a few other entities like the government will be eligible to reimport military-grade firearms. …http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ap-exclusive-obama-offers-new-gun-control-steps

Jer, sadly, “striving to take action where Congress would not,” has to be the beginning of every sentence when it comes to WH actions. We not only ask PBO to be our president, we ask him to do the work of Congress, which instead of functioning as a responsible branch of government, sits on its posterior and throws brickbats.

Morning Ut & Ms Chips – early birds today – great R&S – thank you for all the good news.

Yesterday I was remembering visiting DC in 1978 – it was looking clean & polished after much work for the 1976 celebrations – and the tour operators were still talking about watergate. Sometimes it seems like yesterday & then I realize it was 35 years ago!

UT…thank you for another U-Terrific “Rise and Shine” packed with lots of information. It is great to see the coverage of the march by the local newspapers; especially given the limited/selective coverage by the television media.

On the Today Show this a.m. Savannah Guthrie asked Axelrod if PBO had moved too slow. She asked if PBO should have listened to Hillary Clinton (familiar media theme) and taken action long ago before situation reached this crisis stage. Too fast, too slow—–too white, too black——and on and on we go.

Chipsticks and UT…I want to reiterate my thanks for the AWESOME coverage of the events commemorating the 50th Anniversary March on Washington – both yesterday and on Saturday. The links, videos, pictures, tweets, etc., allowed TODers to experience the events from afar, even if it wasn’t in real time.

And contributions from the blog tyrants and other TOD contributors of historical information, personal experiences, music, and individual reflections brought it all together and made it special for everyone who fellowships at TOD village.

Good Morning TOD World Wide Community
Coming out of lurking to THANK, Chipsticks, UT, LP, LL and others for maintaining such a special place for peeps like myself who can’t always watch live but don’t want to miss a minute of the Dream that is; President Obama and the First Lady Mrs Obama.

HF, he is truly a despicable little twerp who hates America and seeks to undermine and destroy it.
He’s a traitor, pure and simple–a hateful, spiteful little soul who could care less about destroying lives of others. The untold
story in all of this is how many US agents this creep has put in jeopardy. I have nothing but contempt for him.

My thanks again to Chips for all the special coverage of both marches.. it all means so much to have this haven to view history happening. And extra thank yous to ut and the other blog tyrants for their additions- I am so grateful to all of TOD.

Best wishes today and positive thoughts to all the folks who suffered through Katrina.. and who are still picking up their lives.

My laptop BROKE dangit… so have to use son’s whenever he “allows” me… everyone have a good day.. and as ‘Kid President’ says- “Be Awesome”

So my fellow TODers I have good news to report. I had been on pins and needles about the stability of my native country, Ghana, until 20 minutes ago

If you remember I said here in December that my native country had gone through elections and the National Democratic Congress (equivalent of our Democratic party) won the elections. I also said it was uncanny the results mirrored the Obama/Romney results exactly 51% to 47%.

You would think that clear victory and loss would have ended the matter. Well, the Democratic President John Mahama was adjudged to have won in free and fair elections. Pres Obama was excited about the thriving rule of law in Ghana, as were all the international observers. In January the president was inaugurated. However, the loser, Nana Addo, decided to take advantage of a loophole in the constitution to challenge the election results, and took the case to court.

What was his petition about? He wanted 4 million votes that Mahama won in the constituencies to be annulled due to “fraud by the electoral commission”, while those constituencies that he won should be intact for him (somehow the same Electoral Commission was not fraudulent in those constituencies, :eyeroll:). Absurd you say? Well he had the constitutional right to do so. That is the loophole I am talking about. There is no threshold stipulated that allows for a challenge. You can lose by 90% and still have the right to challenge the results.

So for the past 8 months the case has been at the Supreme Court, until today. The verdict just came down 7-2 throwing out his petition. Finally we can breathe a sigh of relief. It was kinda like Romney going to SCOTUS and asking for votes from states that PBO won to be thrown out so he’d be declared winner.

Underneath all this is ethnic politics. The loser belongs to the dominant ethnic group in Ghana while the winner is from Northern Ghana where historically Ashantis captured slaves for sale to slave traders. Psychologically some Ashantis cannot fathom being governed by a Northerner. Mahama’s win shocked them in December. But like PBO he cobbled together a coalition of minorities in Ghana, youth and women, and for the first time in Ghana’s history won outright without a run off.

Now the loser is gonna have to live with the fact that Ghana is a multiethnic country and not an Ashanti country.

That’s all folks. Our democracy has matured and the Supreme court justices, the majority of whom were appointed last decade by the loser’s party, have shown their integrity. Now it’s time to return to regularly scheduled griping about potholes and sloppy waste collection. Ha! 😆

Zizi – thankyou for your good news – it is amazing how TOD is visited by such a world wide audience and it was refreshing to hear that your supreme court upheld the election. I also had little idea as to whether your system of government followed the British or American systems – and on a small amount of internet reading – it seems (to me) to be a combination of both – but I shall have to read further to be sure.

Yep it’s a combination of both, Executive Presidential branch is modeled on the American system. Our parliament is a modified British system and mono-cameral. It is straight up majority rule based on popular vote tallies. However Ghanaian voters are so sophisticated that they easily split their votes (locally called “skirt and blouse voting”) between parties with their parliamentary and presidential candidates. The NDC has a parliamentary majority as well.

Fascinating – especially the “skirt and blouse” – I shall read further. I gather it is usual for your President to have a majority in the parliament – that is one of the useful parts of a British style parliament – the PM belongs to the majority (or ruling minority) party. Does avoid gridlock.

Well the president is elected separately from the parliament. So far we have not yet had a President from a party different from parliamentary majorities It could happen. For instance had the justices ruled the other way and declared the losing candidate winner, he would have been at the mercy of opposition party parliament to pass his agenda.

I understand – but from what you say the voters manage to have the one party being the President and the parliament majority most of the time. We have a two house parliament and our Senate is often a majority of the lower house opposition or more often than not a third party or independent has the balance of power. That can sometimes be a good restraint on an otherwise “out of control” majority government.

Well yes. But since our 4th Republic was set in motion in 1992 (after decades of military coup d’etats after independence) the Ghanaian electorate has pretty much voted for each of the 2 dominant parties to govern for 2 terms then turned over to the other one. The NDC won with Prez Mills in 2008 but sadly he died in office in July 2012, after which Mahama, his Vice Pres was sworn in smoothly. The latter ran for his own term in Dec 2012, which case was resolved today. What will be interesting to watch is whether in 2016 the electorate will renew Mahama’s mandate for his OWN 2nd term or whether they’ll follow their existing pattern of alternating after 2 terms for each party. Or whether they’ll retain him but turn out the NDC majority in parliament.

Interesting politics. For the US, this resolution was critical because Ghana is the beacon of stability in a troubled region, which helps supply peacekeeping troops to quell trouble in other crisis situations around the continent and the world. Had the supreme court decided otherwise, the country would have been thrown into turmoil as the voice of the electorate would have been supplanted by the edict of 9 unelected judges (as happened in Bush vs. Gore)

Yes, 99ts, this is a facinating development. NYTimes, NY Daily News, and NY Post not only endorsing Quinn but running enthusiastic puff pieces on her daily while simultaneously and erroneously attcking Bill deBlasio.
To No Avail. New York Newspapers have made themselves irrelevant.
The people will vote for what we want.
this time at least.

Until the Powers figure out some other way to control our choices and/or the outcomes.

“New York Newspapers have made themselves irrelevant”. Cable news heading the same way. People no longer need those forms of media to learn the truth.

Bit sad that in my world some newspapers still seem to hold sway when it comes to elections. They are currently printing about 85% items in support of the right wing party. Not sure why the internet is less important here – perhaps because out campaigns are only 6 weeks long, voting is compulsory & things such as “town halls”, “meet & greet” never happen. I have received about 3 leaflets in my letter box – sum total of local election material!

“F” Carol Costello and Dana Bash. These same people would be trashing the President if he did nothing. How could he let Syria get away with using chemical weapons on it’s people, without doing something.

Does the President call congress into session – I thought that was Boehner’s job (for the house). Do these people even understand how a parliamentary democracy works – as being different to the US system of government.

Is it any wonder so many Americans don’t understand how their government works (or doesn’t work) as the case may be – with this type of nonsense on national display. They are all beginning to sound like they went to the Sarah Palin School of International Learning.

Most people watching a television would have yelled at her, “Congress is not in session now, and hasn’t been in session for the past month, why don’t you frigging ask Boehner and Reid that question instead of saying the President is relieved?”

Are our members of Congress children who can’t take initiative on their own? Sheesh.

How about some calls as to why Boehner has a pressing engagement to talk about gutting medicare, medicaid and SS in Idaho – at a fundraiser – rather than attend the 50 year anniversary of the March on Washington.

GWEN IFILL: I interviewed Taylor Branch, the civil rights historian, for part of our series on the March on Washington yesterday, and one of the things he said was that you suffer – you are a victim of partisan racial gridlock. That’s the way he put it. And you talked a moment ago about that a little bit. I wonder whether you think that’s true, and if so, what, if anything, the first African-American president can do to break through that kind of motivated gridlock.

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, you know, I was on stage with President Clinton, and I remember him having a pretty hard time with the Republicans as well. There does be a habit sometimes of just Democratic presidents generally being – efforts being made to delegitimize them in some fashion. And that’s fine because, you know, politics is – is not – is not bean bag, as they used to say – it’s not a noncontact sport. And – and I don’t worry about it personally.

I do think what – what you’ve seen – and I – I touched on this theme during the speech – I think it has less to do with my – my race, but there is an argument that was made in 1964, 1965 on through the ’80s and ’90s in which those who resisted any change in the status quo, particularly when it came to economic opportunity, made two big arguments.

Argument number one was, any efforts by government to help folks who were locked out of opportunity, whether it was minorities or the poor generally, unions, any effort by government to help those folks is bad for the economy. And that became a major argument. And if, in fact, people start thinking the government’s the problem instead of the solution, then what that leaves you is whatever the marketplace does on its own. And what we’ve seen is a marketplace that increasingly produces very unequal results. And it – so it – it disempowers our capacity for common action to do something about poverty, to do something to help middle-class families.

And I think the second element to that argument that has been made, sometimes subtly, sometimes not so subtly, is that government has hurt middle-class families or hurt white working-class families, because, you know, pointy-headed bureaucrats in Washington are just trying to help out minorities or trying to give them something free.

And you know, there’s a line that’s drawn between the deserving poor and the undeserving poor. And you know, that, I think, has been a fairly explicit politics in this country for some time. And it’s directed at Bill Clinton or Nancy Pelosi just as much as it’s directed at me. I – I think it – it doesn’t have to do with my race in particular; it has to do with an effort to make sure people who might otherwise challenge the existing ways that things work are divided.

I get a little weary of this mime. Yes, the Republicans were awful when Clinton was in office, but when he promoted universal healthcare, they didn’t depict him as an “African” witchdoctor. They didn’t talk about “tar babies” or make demoralizing jokes about his mother. They had no obsession with watermelons and fried chicken and they certainly didn’t refer to Clinton as a thug. No doubt, some of the Republican recalcitrance is partisanship, but it’s drunk with racism.

There was a time where people could civilly disagree. Point of views could be expressed and debated without personal attacks or disparaging comments. It made compromise more of a possibility because people were more apt to listen when positions were reasonably expressed.

It is ashamed that there are some who don’t feel a need or a responsibility to treat others with respect; not even the person who holds the highest office in this country.

No but they did call him a serial rapist, murdering drug dealer so there’s that. Imo no matter what Dem had won the election back in 2008 the other side was going to do everything possible to delegitimize them. They had the playbook already printed for whoever the candidate.

Granted the GOP would be in opposition to any democrat elected President and would use any tool available to gain a political advantage. Just so happens the deep rooted racial hatred many in this country feel toward AA has been marshalled by the GOP in its fight against all things PBO. I don’t remember people wanting to “take their country back” when Clinton was elected. Clinton did not have to ride around in a tank for his personal protection, nor were his vacations or perks of office or birth certificate srutinized the way PBO’s have been. The level of opposition to PBO has been ahistorical. Personally I think the racial dynamic is most obvious in PBO’s treatment by so called progressives. For example, can anyone give me a logical nonracial reason for Clinton (the man who signed Don’t Ask Don’t Tell the Defense of Marriage Act into law) is celebrated by gay progressives, while PBO (the man who undid those terrible laws) is treated with scorn and disrespect? This worship at the altar of Bill Clinton is irksome because it seems like a (perhaps unconscious) yearning for a white president. Where was all this Clinton love during GWB’s presidency?

While racism certainly plays a strong role in the way Repubs have treated President Obama, I have a feeling that a President Hilary Clinton is going to be put through the fire by them as well — of course on different grounds, but just as nasty. They just cannot accept losses and that’s why they’re doing everything to prevent certain groups from voting. I don’t think President Obama wants to focus on racism while he is in office. He may be more frank in 2017.

Hillary will not be President in 2016. The media is hoping she is the Dem nominee for a reason – to see a Republican get elected in 2016. They will eviscerate her and use her candidacy to destroy the Dem party, driving all kinds of wedges between her supporters, PBO supporters, etc. Notice that the MSM always tries to compare her (and Bill) with PBO, but never with Christie, whom in theory, she’ll be running against if she gets the Dem nomination?

I agree with your thoughts on PBO – and that is a reason why it is/was pointless to compare his speech to that of MLK yesterday. (Which the foolish media pundits just had to do). It was the role of Dr King to provide the demonstration to the politicians that 2nd class was no longer an option, equality was coming and it had to be now. President Obama is the politician. He is President of all Americans and doesn’t want to be seen as representing some to the exclusion of others.

Oh, I agree with you and DerBingle that Republicans will show disrespect and disregard for any Democrat that is in office. And yes, they called Clinton everything under the sun. Anyone can be a serial rapist or murdering drug dealer, but witchdoctors, nooses, watermelons, tar babies, welfare insults are meant to be specific. I hardly expect the President to “call them out”, but I am weary of a media that keeps asking the question when they already know the answer.

I agree with you FayPax about the underlying racial sentiment in the GOP’s opposition to PBO. However, I don’t think that PBO himself should be tasked with the burden of having to publicly accuse the GOP of racism in a televised interview – when it is implicitly understood by all of us (including the GOP AND the media) that his race is a primary factor in this equation.

I believe that the explicit and public identification of the GOP’s racism in their opposition to PBO should be left to political activists (of any race), Democratic, Republican and Independent politicians and strategists, community organizers, ordinary citizens like you and me. The MSM is trying to bait PBO into saying that the GOP is racist towards him, hoping that some kind of racial war or divide ensues. We need to call out the MSM and let them know that regardless of what PBO says in an interview about racism towards him, we AND they both know that his race is a key factor in the majority of opposition towards him from both the left and right.

Furthermore, they need to stop trying to bait him into superficial race arguments when he needs to be focused on other serious matters, and instead should focus on confronting the GOP & Libertarian left, and not enabling their racist bullshit and obstructionism – which has been bad for the country and 99% of its citizens.

HF, I lift my glass to you (clink). Thanks for this fabulous comment. You have said exactly what I was thinking when President Obama responded to that question. Seriously, did Judy Woodruff really think that PBO was going to say well YES, actually, I do think that the reason for the GOP gridlock is because of my race. He deftly handled a gotcha question (to which Judy Woodruff already knew the answer) with brilliance and aplomb.

I agree with your take HP2. Evidence of the devious motives of the MSM can be found in the fact that they NEVER ask PBO’s political enemies about the role race plays in the rabid hatred and unprecedented disrespect PBO has endured. WHy must PBO provide theories for why he is treated the way he is when they can ask the blatantly race baiting politicians what their motivations are.

They didn’t have race to use against Clinton, but they used everything else. They accused him of every crime known to man, including murder. Every day was a new despicable accusation. They were relentless against Clinton also.

The flack that Clinton got doesn’t compare to what Obama is getting, no way, no how. Clinton got some opposition from the GOP (and by the way much of that was because they erroneously thought he was doing too much for Black people), and it is true there were lots of gossip rumors going thru the MSM. But the nasty treatment PBO is getting from the left in particular, was not there with Clinton – even when they didn’t like what he was doing.

Do you think that if Obama was caught with his pants down in the oval office and having relations with an intern, he would leave office with a 60% approval rating?

Dotster, I agree. They were relentless against Clinton. The problem with the playbook they use against President Obama is that when they use race as a line of attack, they insult an entire segment of the population. Come to think about it…even our so-called enemies are people of color.

It’s true that right wing talk radio was relentless attacking Clinton. But you can you cite any example of members of Congress calling him a liar in his face or members of the White House Press openly mocking and disrespecting him?

I have no expectation he should fall for that setup…it’s the media and the constant attempt to place him in that position and the comparison to Clinton that I find exasperating. If my comment leads one to believe otherwise, I simply wasn’t clear. PBO is perfect…it’s the media I’d like to bash in the face. 🙂

LH, thank you, thank you for excerpting this quote. This was an absolutely brilliant summary of all that’s been wrong with this country since the Reagan (government isn’t the solution, its the problem) presidency. It’s based on a privileged assumption of who is or isn’t “worthy” of help and a blind devotion to the impersonal free market. Nothing must stand in the way of the privileged making the maximum amount of money with no restraints, no taxes and no obligations to the less fortunate. It’s truly a bleak, nihilistic view of society with no sense of community and no compassion. That PBO was able to take a loaded question about race and turn it into this thoughtful analysis of anti-government political and economic philosophy is just jaw-dropping. This was a tour de force and I defy any other political figure to have done this so beautifully.

Have to say yesterday even with the hot and sticky, off and on again rainy weather, when the FLOUTS walked out in that beautiful dress, with our most handsome POTUS it was like a ray of sunshine for me. I think I even gasped. My friends and I started jumping up and down, clapping, and cheering. Everyone seemed so very, very gleeful for that moment in time.

Michelle’s dress was truly spectacular. I am a flower lover and artist. My Mom died in February and I have
been searching for the red poppy with black center depicted on that dress for a planter pot I am intending to keep in memorium to Mom. She had those poppies blooming every year. I will find them for next season as I began my search too late this year.

And there are policies in place along with systemic and psychological brainwashing to ensure that Blacks do NOT have equal access to education as whites, and when they do they are not able to take advantage in the same way. That’s why PBO is talking about universal high-quality preschool – because he knows that the disparity (and the psychological brainwashing that comes along with it) starts when they are very young and is very hard to reverse.

Remarks by the President at the “Let Freedom Ring” Ceremony Commemorating the 50th Anniversary of the March on Washington

August 28, 2013

—————————————————————

Everyone who realizes what those glorious patriots knew on that day — that change does not come from Washington, but to Washington; that change has always been built on our willingness, We The People, to take on the mantle of citizenship — you are marching. (Applause.)

And that’s the lesson of our past. That’s the promise of tomorrow — that in the face of impossible odds, people who love their country can change it. That when millions of Americans of every race and every region, every faith and every station, can join together in a spirit of brotherhood, then those mountains will be made low, and those rough places will be made plain, and those crooked places, they straighten out towards grace, and we will vindicate the faith of those who sacrificed so much and live up to the true meaning of our creed, as one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. (Applause.)

When I hear constant cries about “Obama should do ________?” it strikes me that too many of us have forgotten the meaning of “we” in the slogan “Yes We Can!”

As I watch and listen to President Obama, what I’ve heard as his one overriding message is that he wants us to recognize the power of “we.” For example, his entire speech at the 2012 Democratic Convention was dedicated to the idea of citizenship. And yesterday in honor of the 1963 March on Washington, he took up that theme again.

This is bothering me, so I must share. Yesterday, three young soldiers visited me.

“What’s that you’re looking at on television?” they asked.

Me: “The anniversary celebration of the March On Washington.

“The what?”

I explained…yada, yada…”you know, the “I Have a Dream Speech.”

“Oh!…Well, who is that speaking?”

“Myrlie Evers.”

“Who?”

“Medgar Evers widow.”

“Who in the world is Medgar Evers?”

I was so disgusted, I had to preach and teach a little bit. Then I discovered not one of them was registered to vote. I put them in my car and drove them to register…now I just hope they follow through.